print at the same time and we consider it a very successful i endeavor to experience with what electronic books are going to be. electronic books in the future

are going to be a major force in publishing and i certainly want to purchase a paid in that and so does simon and schuster threshold editions. also, what we are going to talk about today is "america for sale," which is in the first week of sales. we just got notified it will come november 1st, be on "the new york times" best-seller list debuting at number 11. so we are very pleased with the success of the book, and thank you for coming out today. we will have about half an hour on want to present the book is about and then take some questions from you at the end of that time. i wrote a "america for sale" as a clarion call for action. the whole idea is to understand the circumstances that are going on right now in terms of the compromise of the united states sovereignty by what's happening to the dollar with deficits budget to be positive so the last third of this book is solutions.

what we can do as a subtitle says fighting new world order, surviving the global depression and preserving u.s. sovereignty. so the themes of this book at the last third or to give solutions and call to action for how we can organize our lives, how we can organize politically in order to fight back to say no to a global new deal. now, to get everyone's mind of around the idea of america for sale, i like to start at this way. we currently have page 24 of the book and document we have got about a 65.5 trillion what the t negative net worth. now what that means, that is according to the department treasury's own statistics. once a year the deeper and the treasury does a gap accounting and david walker, who was the head of the government

accountability office actually resigned in 2008 it went on the week up to our alarming people, telling people essentially that if we did not deal with the financial crisis in these unfunded liabilities, the united states was going to face a financial crisis and danger to the dollar. now as i point out the social security administration, medicare and medicaid already have trillions of dollars of negative unfunded liabilities. and the social security administration very quickly is going to go negative on a cash basis, which means that the money coming in is going to be less than the money going out on a current basis. why? a lot of people, be the boomers age 62 are going to retire early, many of them can't find jobs, and also with fewer people employed with recession, the unemployment, social security revenues are down.

so now we are borrowing, president obama saying we are going to bar a $1.4 trillion in 2009 just to keep the federal budget going. going to be borrowing $9 trillion over the next ten years. now that means we will be doubling the national debt of the united states from the time the republic was created in the next nine years and that is an unsustainable amount of borrowing especially when we are so heavily dependent on china to buy the debt. now, to get a full idea what i mean by america for sale you can see the image we put on the cover of the book which is the tad of america has a sales tag the little red and so you can tie it on to something to be sold with the bar code, and so i am seeing with the social security checks maybe we ought

to and starting to print social security checks at the bottom paid to you courtesy the china. we couldn't pay the social security checks or the medicare or the medicaid unfunded liabilities. in fact maybe we ought to go a step further. maybe we ought to just owls worse the social security up ministration to china. since we are a outsourcing so many millions of jobs we can eliminate the middleman. china can do the administration social security cheaper, right? to get cheaper labor they can do this cheaper, and we don't have to pass the money for washington to send the checks to the social security recipients. let's just funded directly from china. see, this is the problem. and as i document in the book, china is saying increasingly that they do not want to accept trillions of dollars of u.s. debt accumulating.

china has already got $2 trillion of u.s. foreign exchange reserves accumulated, which is the most any country has had durham in the history of the world, and china is concerned by 80% of those assets are in dollar assets. china is concerned they are going to in the holding trillions of dollars of dollar assets they're going to devalue because nobody in the history of the world has printed money like this without having the negative consequences, hyperinflation, the dollar devaluing and china is fully aware of that risk. now with china saying that they want a solution to this, the plan has come forward from robert blundell, and i spent an entire chapter of the book describing meet the globalist. and i point out to the globalist are going from henry kissinger

to the beginning of the book who wrote a column earlier this year the international herald tribune where henry kissinger said barack obama as president of to use this economic crisis globally to create a new world order, and he published those words. the idea being if we have a global economy we need a global governance system. in other words with kissinger and other globalist economists are calling for is a system where the united nations, the world bank, the international monetary fund, the world trade organization sets the rules for the international economy. not the u.s. government. our economy would be dictated to by these international organizations with rules set for us. so one of the globalist site went out is robert blundell.

robert blundell is an economy at columbia university. but he's not just simply an academic. robert mondello is credited with being the father of the euro and he has been writing she won a nobel prize in 1999 for arguing that currencies have to have an optimal currency area, in other words a nation state like the united states is not an optimum currency area and robert blundell's view because it isn't a trade area. europe or the european union is a trade area, hence the year ago is justified in robert monreal's version to be created. similarly in the united states the idea would be a regional currency to precede a one world currency. china's had printed with the dollar has rushed ahead the plan with the one world currency.

china's idea advanced by robert mondell is that we would have the international monetary fund utilize the special drawing rights facility at the imf to be funded so they can be alternative to the dollar to settle international trade. now again, it's not an academic idea. as i point out in america for sale at the g20 meeting there was just heldman blonden and apr the final communique which president obama agreed to on behalf of the united states, was to fund $250 billion to the international monetary fund to create special drawing rights and alternative won a world currency to the dollar and international trade. why one world currency? because the international monetary fund is an international organization, and as it issues the special drawing

rights as a currency facility, it bypasses all the currencies of the individual nation states in order to hold of the foreign exchange reserves that result from international trade. those who want to see documentation of this beyond what i wrote in america for sale just take a look at the website of the g20. go ahead and go to g20.org, and on the right-hand side you're going to see london communique. clich that. you will go to the website of the london summit, and five of the document sending the fund, to enter a $50 billion. it's pretty remarkable when you think about it and most americans are going to find this hard to believe that the president of the united states is actively as it were undermining the dollar by having an active participation in the creation of the dollar's one

world alternative on the international scene. but it's happening. it was fully reported in "the wall street journal" of the time, it was reported in the financial times and london. most americans in the mainstream media just ignored it as too technical. don't bother the american people with this detail. even though it's the first step of the death of the dollar. now, in writing a chapter on meet the globalist i focused on people like george soros who fits into the plan here of the destruction of the dollar. a chapter of the book is titled the plan to destroy the dollar. and george soros, just to make it clear george soros is argued, remember george sorus made his first billion betting against the pound. so he is used to attacks on the

nation's currency. and george soros as a globalist quote his many writings he says continuously nation states like the united states belong to the day when kings had castles. in other words we are anachronism and george soros's world we need to be replaced by more of a global governance system. and also, i quoted at the end of the book george soros who funded both barack obama, one of the main founders of barack obama and also since 2005 is supported john mccain. so george soros was an going to lose no matter who won. and george soros told the daily mail in london that this was a very good international recession for him. he came out of retirement and cents to run his quantum investment fund and since 2007, the daily mail estimated george

soros's gained made $2.9 billion. with a bee. largely investing against the dollar and against the united states economy. the globalist don't intend to lose. but the globalist are both right and left republican and democrat. george h. w. bush proclaimed joint session of congress the new world order. and this has been carried forth by bill clinton, who made sure nafta was signed, continued to advance the plan to get china and the world trade organization on the right, david rockefeller, a document david rockefeller's ridings where he says yes i am guilty of being an internationalist to the detriment of the concern about the u.s. economy as a u.s. economy. so, on the right, globalism has

the idea your currency, your laws are a speed bump to me. the need to be eliminated. i don't want currency risk or administrative law week risk in the management of my companies. and by the way, we like to in a global basis be able to find labor, the cheapest wherever we can find it in the world, even if it is slightly durham common your slave labor in india or in china, morals and forget about. multinational corporations in this you on the political right, the rockefeller wing of the republican party have always thought would be dictated by the interests of the multinational corporate profits. on the left, globalism is of course workers of the world unite. and borders being eliminated allow the united states to import an underclass from mexico

that is largely illegal, and of course that is viewed as here come the voters for the democratic party, the new underclass for the decades to come. now, if those same numbers of immigrants i effectively argued we should have an aggressive hispanic immigration but legally if we secure the borders, if we kept out the drug dealers, the criminals, the criminal gangs, the terrorists, it wouldn't be as convenient for the political left because ironically that these people are the legal permits the labor to be more aggressively exploited. if they are illegal they can't complain about low wages and no benefits. and and aggressively ever used underclass has always been the formula for building a political base. so those who think that the idea of illegal border with equally

aggressive identical numbers of immigrants would satisfy the democrats are wrong. the idea is to utilize those who are here and make sure the border is never secured. the loser in this equation is never the globalist. it's never henry paulson who at goldman sachs, another huge campaign contributor to barack obama and john mccain, take a look at henry paulson. henry paulson meeks and made millions of dollars personally by simply having trade missions to send jobs to china. and then as the secretary of the treasury continued the same thing. paulson did not suffered personally as a globalist anymore than did george soros. the globalist circling to win.

who's going to lose is the american middle class. because as i argue in this book to show you the statistics i wrote a chapter called exporting jobs and importing an underclass. and i point out that the real wage analysis published even magazines like foreign affairs, the council on foreign relations this supports globalism, here we have to academics writing an article saying we better do something fast because real wages in the united states are decreasing. since 2000 to 2005 by 96% of the population. the only winners are the few people managing the multinational corporations or the lawyers, accountants and other advisers serving the needs of the multinational corporations. and real americans are losing wages we are into the first globalist recession caused by globalist. so, traditional methods of

getting out of recessions, namely the dollar decreases in value so we export more, well, we don't export manufacturing at all. because if you look at it hard, in the future there will be no job in manufacturing that the multinational corporations won't send overseas. or in the white collar jobs to india all of the jobs and medical records, accounting, legal research, even the 800 call numbers answered in india. because americans cost too much as workers. the only thing the globalist or wanting the united states to do is be a consuming society. and then i write a whole chapter on dependence on oil because this is another way we are letting currency go out of the united states. and i showed that i've predicted

another books black gold stranglehold wheel can be found a predicted would be found in abundance at deep levels in the earth and deep water. brazil is about to become saudi arabia of the western hemisphere , and yet president obama has not resolved to make a decision on the offshore drilling driven by congress of the end of the bush administration. we can't keep shoveling billions of dollars out the door to other countries and foreign exchange reserves or like china, china announced recently in some academic articles china but like to have public-private partnerships where the exchange their debt for equity. in other words for these trillions of dollars of debt china might see why don't we manage a few ports in the united states? weigel we manage a few highways? my suggestion is maybe we should sell california to china. it is in debt. california.

the last third of this book i'm focusing on what we can do as americans to fight back to say no to a global deal which is a massive transfer of wealth not only within the united states but from the united states to the third world organize and manipulated and i show in the book through treaties proposed like the cat and trade u.n. deal that will be discussed copenhagen as a global summit. a cat and a trade for the u.n. to have the. all i advise the people began in their own lives, in other words just as in the depression people had to be sure they had a primary residential real-estate even if it meant consolidating the family. bring back into the home parents who are aging rather than going to a nursing home. brothers and sisters who lose jobs bring them back into the

family so if we have a consolidated family with more than one potential breadwinner the chances of surviving a long-term economic downturn are greater. and i am saying that unemployment at 10% or near is going to be a long-term chronic problem. secondly, the about local communities living back in local communities. there are 200 approximately communities printing their own money and it is totally illegal. go to the berkshires. there is shares. it's very much like the airlines print frequent-flier dollars. so if in fact you can print your local money and we have got a situation where the currency you go to the bank, by the local currency at a discount, spend and merchants that are actively employed u.s. citizens or those legally here with right to work selling goods made in america

and are keeping the money in the community. i advise we look at a whole series of steps in terms of political action steps. the federal reserve i agree with ron paul if the federal reserve will not submit to aggressive audit maybe we should just propose closing it down. we do not need the federal reserve to print our currency under president kennedy was the last time the treasury printed its own currency, those red sealed bills some of you might remember during the kennedy administration were treasury bills. also we don't need federal reserve to set interest rates, set by the market. the treasury could perform the market functions, federal reserve does. the federal reserve is no more part of the federal government as a private bank. it's no more part of the government and the federal reserve is a government package service.

reserve in name only. private bank debt charges interest for our money. i recommend of the dollar is under such distress let's look at the gold back international dollar. or rather than abandoning the dollar we go back to the reinforcing the value of the dollar. right now, the treasury and obama administration says the obama administration supports the dollar, stronger dollar but there is no evidence of that when the dollar is going down and tell you every day against the euro and the future of peeing unfunded liabilities in the neighborhood of 65 or more trillion dollars is it can only be done if the dollar is what they called monetized in other words the plan has to be in the dollar of a rise to cannot be paid out. so when you get your thousand dollars social security checks it may still be $1,000 but a

good look by eating hamburger and a cup of coffee with it. that is the problem of the devalued dollar we are heading toward. and right now to keep interest rates low the federal reserve is buying treasury debt. if you can imagine is like using the mastercard to be the visa bill and for any of you who have tried that it doesn't last jury long as a good strategy. eventually you run out of all of your credit and you are stuck with still paying the bills. we are going to have to raise interest rates eventually. which means that the 1970's may get revisited. high interest rates and increasing prices for commodities other jobs difficult to find and the inflationary stagflation, stagnant economy inflation headed to the disadvantage again in the middle class.

i also point out another strategy in addition to ending these deficits and balancing the federal budget, not just on a cash basis but gap basis and there is a radical idea. the current stock market rally that we are experiencing with the stock market of 10,000 is funded again by the federal reserve to recall the federal reserve seems to know how to do is a bubble machine. so under alan greenspan i thought it would only happen once keeping interest rates as i point out in america for sale i give you the charts 1% in 2003 and in 2004. that led to the real-estate bubble. people felt their houses had doubled in value in 2006 and began using their houses as atm machines. okay, it was all a bubble. those values collapsed, and similarly when interest rates

now by helicopter bin bernanke or at 0i never thought the fed could top 1%. in other words i think it has to be challenged the could be negative interest rates. maybe to get people to take their money. with one -- with zero interest rates which is where we are now the fed has converted the dollar into the carrying trade. in other words the yen used to be the trade where we can borrow the currency at such a low rate and zero unless they're going to pay you to borrow that is the lowest the the federal reserve facility that is open to a whole variety of investment banks or banks that run investment units the money is borrowed from the fed and invested in the stock market. so it is pure speculation on your money. of course it is borrowed from china but that's detail. and works only as long as the stock market goes up.

just like it happened in the house in kabul. so, when it hits the point where interest rates have to start increasing which they are going to naturally do in this double in the stock market is going to burst just as the bubble did in the housing market. and we are going to find this irrational and exuberance once again will have a detriment to americans who have said this is recovery if this is recovery it is a jobless recovery and an artificially created recovery stimulated by the federal government under president obama throwing billions into the next. the last part of the strategies in addition to citing these issues exposing them and fighting them as i and the look with two chapters explaining that we the people are sovereign once we begin to realize this we

are seeing in the tea party movements the 912 movement, the reaction to town hall and these are having enormous impact. president obama community organizer in chief might only like it when he's organizing himself from the left but when middle americans organize themselves and speak out it is inappropriate to demonize middle americans as if they were not see it become nazis. this is a true expression of americans who want to see the united states preserved for themselves and for their children who want to see a balanced budget, do not want trillions of dollars borrowed, and what i'm arguing is in the mind and tenth amendments states that are passing these resolutions same powers not specifically enumerated in the federal government are reserved to the states that our people. in other words, letting the reading of the general welfare calls a constitution which

sometimes government expansionists want to read the federal government can do anything it wants and it's for our general welfare we go back and say no states that pass the ninth and tenth resolutions and to think we are going to find states, we have got randy running for governor in oklahoma on a movement if he's elected governor he's going to put the attorney general in place who will say to the federal government take your money back on highways we don't need it. here's your welfare money federal government we don't need it. here is your hospital money will run our own hospitals. and those were dependent on generous federal welfare benefits don't like it they can move to another state. and when these states like oklahoma, texas, montana, the dakotas start saying we are going to lower taxes, we are going to bring businesses in and

invite the publication of local currencies, we are going to stimulate business because the vast majority of jobs in america are created by small businesses a government that is planning to raise $10 trillion in debt is we to have to confiscate everybody's wealth and will still be broken. despite the fact the programs like universal health insurance are positively motivated who doesn't have sympathy for people who don't have health insurance and can't get medical treatment. we all have sympathy for that. but the idea that the federal government can put in a 16% of the economy control and pay for it is ridiculous. and the federal government knows that. it's almost a conscious strategy to cause such chaos by funding generous social wear fur programs that we can't afford. in the final analysis market factor to the to -- margaret thatcher was right socialism

deals because eventually you run out of other people's money to spend. i and this by saying here this in a sense is one of the more positive moments in america because as millions of americans wake up to the fact we're living in a historic time when we have to hold back the power of the federal government we have to get fiscal, fiscal house in order, we have to stimulate jobs and return to the private enterprise system. i think there are millions as evidence how many of you have shown up today taking time sunday afternoon this beautiful weather when there is a great football and other things to watch and participate in millions of americans who realize those buried in arlington did not fight and die for united nations or world trade organization they fought and died for the united states

of america and the constitution of the united states of america. and as we resolve to go back to those principles of the founding fathers, to work with states which will have my and tenth amendments resolutions i feel we have a time that's historic to take america back and make a statement to the future which is that we want to leave an american not that our children and grandchildren are burdened with debt from which they will never emerge, but have the opportunity instead to live in an america where our founding fathers cherished of liberties and new the limited form of government was by nature a human right, human nature demanded we have these types of constitutional protections. three branches of government balancing each other, a government whose powers were

limited. if we can get back to that we can leave our children the same free nation we were born into. and i think that that is not only our birthright, it is our birth obligation and it's for those reasons i wrote a "america for sale." i'm tremendously thankful for those of you who have bought the book, read the book, who are here today, who have listened to me on the radio and television shows i have done. i can't express my gratitude enough for the encouragement i have that in fact we are going to win, left and right, republicans and democrats so this year if the democrats are in, vote them out. if the republicans come in and don't do any better it is what we've the people vote them out. and eventually in washington, where elected representatives are going to understand you don't send them to washington to enrich themselves and against our interests.

we sent their representatives to listen to we have the people who have always been the sovereign and can reclaim that sovereignty if only we will take the time to do so, and i believe that will happen. god bless you and thank you for being here. [applause] i will answer a few questions if we have a few questions from the audience, we have a microphone here and we will be happy to answer some. come on in. >> there are some marchers appeared. you can move up. first question. >> this whole environmental thing that is global to begin with, do you envision that as a real takeover of globalist and control? >> there was a warning i wrote about very recently from christopher mountain who was a science adviser for margaret

thatcher who or and if president obama went and signed the copenhagen protocol and attempted to make it all of course it should require a two-thirds vote of the senate as a treaty that we would be entering into or trying to be entered into a kind of jump start idea that we need to participate in this world cup and trade scheme. first of all as i argued in america for sale this audience is in dispute. there's good signs indicating that the world is cooling and good science indicating some activity is at a minimum and some activity is directly related to the temperature of the earth. i guess the kids and president obama and al gore and slash sun heats earth but the idea we should enter into a global scheme that would tax americans and be administered by the united nations which is what copenhagen is about reveals the

underlining agenda of the global hysteria crowd has always been global government. the idea if you go back to the this and i've researched extensively to paul ehrlich and john coltrane, current sign and azar who was a co-author of ehrlich, the population of enthusiasm, their idea originally was there are too many people. and by the way, we are really bad because we exhale carbon dioxide. that makes us pretty dangerous. trees had to like it but paul ehrlich didn't. so early on the climate couldn't decide if the problem was the earth was going to freeze or warmup in global warming and they still can't make up their mind. they just know carbon dioxide is bad and we ought to tax it by the u.n.. so i think once we get that through our mind we can see that is another attempt to put america for sale as part of the effort to get us where everybody

is raised here or they're the united nations was supposed to be great and good ideas that is until we watch more speeches by khaddafi. anybody see that speech? unfortunately that is one of his coherent attempt to express himself. at any rate the same stage is mahmoud ahmadinejad from iran who declares the holocaust never happened, he is building nuclear weapons and threatens to wipe israel of the earth. as i point out a chapter meets the globalist brzezinski, adviser to jimmy carter, that turned out well for hundred 40 days in the hostage crisis that ended the presidency has been one of the mentors to get barack obama ready for the presidency and persians the has been riding and i document for years seeing the united nations should control u.s. foreign policy. here comes president obama of the united nations speaks to the general assembly.

noss part of american exceptional as some and he's the first president to cherish a security council meeting. what does this mean? security council going to dictate u.s. foreign policy? or more khaddafi and mahmoud ahmadinejad have equal vote? so i think these are the issues and raising in fighting "america for sale." thank you. good question. next question? don't be shy. yes? >> i heard one of the senators read that actually said that the federal government has the right to enforce such things as the health care, virtually anything if they say is for the general welfare and i am sure it is by no means the only one that feels that way. how do we get past that kind of madness? >> i spent a section of "america for sale" addressing the issue and it's interesting. i was reflecting on this coming in for the speech. just on friday president obama declared emergency, national emergency over the swine flu.

now i have to research this but the previous national emergencies i can remember or 9/11 and maybe a national emergency declared under franklin roosevelt. i objected to george w. bush in doing the book having passed and signed two executive order which give the president the right to self-declared national emergency without the congress involvement and looking at the swine flu 1,000 people have died, that's tragic. but how many people this year by from automobile accidents? where is the national emergency? the agenda of government control where there is the vaccine, health emergency, i have written in "america for sale" extensively in the eye of light on speed where i am a reporter let's see where this crisis develops. was this a, you will but the attempt to protect americans from legitimate health crisis or was this an excuse to get a

power grab by the federal government to say health scare we need to grab more power and a suspect and people like rahm emanuel, and i quote in the book, and hillary clinton also, rahm emanuel, chief of staff in the white house, hillary clinton, secretary of state declared don't let any crisis go to waste in government and administration that things that we also think to create a crisis so that it couldn't go to waste? it is a legitimate question we are going to watch but thank you for asking. i read a section arguing we shouldn't have any presidential declarations of emergency without explicit act of congress to affirm this. next question, please. >> again, don't be shy. >> usurp. >> do we have the statesman both sides of the all at present there are going to be able to speak up and start defending some of the americans that do have a concern about where we

are going? i seem to see a deafening silence on both sides of the aisle that there doesn't seem to be much of the way of open discussion about what we are seeing. >> the two parties -- i've never been a member of either of the democratic or the republican party and when i rode the obama nation i made it clear i was not voting for john mccain. i am a member of the constitution party and i voted for chuck baldwin for president. and by the way, the constitution party is getting ready to do advertising with the handle de symbol, the democrats not plus the republicans with elephant, the baala brought to you by the constitution party. if lindsey graham and john mccain are the future of the republican party i think most americans are going to say to the republicans can keep the party. what i see here in front outpouring of american feelings, and by the with a loss of ratings and president obama has been a historic plummet, now

just a few months into office here we are looking at the ratings going down from january of 78, nearly 80% to 50% and we are not even through the first year in office a there is tremendous disappointment even from the left with president obama but certainly middle america. i warned when i wrote the obama nation the president would rule from the far left. he would not be a pragmatist like president clinton was. by the way i think hillary clinton would have been more of a pragmatist had she won. but the democratic party is largely today dominated by the far left. and when america understands the far left america is not going to agree with the far left. redistribution of wealth when i point that out it was what president obama, a candidate obama really believed people felt that hard to accept. today we see it happening. and i think the leadership that

is going to come on a am looking to the 12th movement, the constitution, right now we see the republicans democrats are the two parties of the united states we're today are the way? does because democrats today are the true dominant parties does not mean either will survive another 50 years. i think we are undergoing a fundamental political realignment we're middle america is rising up, social security recipients are saying we want social security. we don't want to have to have rationed medical care, which is inevitable if we are going to take millions of americans and get them publicly funded medical care. i know many doctors i can see a couple of them in this room are personal friends. the next medical instrument will pick up is the golf club. the idea of all this regulation,

the idea they're going to have to get the bureaucrats decision before they make a medical decision. this is going to be unacceptable to people who went into medicine with a healing vocation. not with a vocation do to justify their decisions to a 28-year-old or 35 year old who believes you are told for hip replacement and it isn't cost-effective to give you one. yes, sir? and welcome. >> do you think the mainstream media has fought to come are not particularly in the plight of the fact the white house decided they didn't want fox news involved in the white house paul? >> i was encouraged to see the major networks side with fox and see if foxx wasn't going to be admitted into the pool they didn't need to cover the interview.

finally, maybe the wall will fall through the bottom of the goal for the mainstream media because an attack on the media on fox because this far less ideologically driven obama administration doesn't like what fox reports. when fox is trying to do the most critical job possible all the mainstream media ought to realize the white house can malkoff fox then we'd better get ready to start redeeming all of our media which was truth and the russian ideological press. today i think for the internet i'm very proud to be a writer on world net daily. i think we continue to do investigative journalism. we try to be fearless. i have got an abused by both sides of the nile. michael about excoriate me when i rode the great leave usa that

there was a plan that by the way thomas aquino, the canadian head of the equivalent of the chamber of commerce, admits he did concoct with the council of foreign relations to advance the security and prosperity partnership. when i exposed and wrote about that, the political right didn't like it. when i rode the obama nation the political left and didn't like it. i wasn't going to get invited to any obama white house christmas dinners. well there's a fourth estate again when journalists don't care if they are invited to the christmas dinner or like my father was a journalist said it to get invited to the white house dinner don't go. because the moment you do you will be compromised. and if we get a fourth estate again in this country i think we have the possibility of advancing freedom. if we stay where we are today, the mainstream media is not doing its job. it is not investigating the

obama administration is protecting the chosen one, and that is a loss of the freedom for all americans. i'm proud to be able to write this. i'm proud simon and sister threshold addition supported me to do so. i am proud that worldnetdaily continues to work with me as investigative reporter, and i am determined i don't judge my success on how much of calls i get up the white house. take one more question and then i think we cannot it up. yes, sir. >> this order should of the enterprise like car companies, health care providers or insurance companies and so on in some way or unconstitutional? >> it's an excellent question. i hope it will get contest it. when we see, in this last week that the federal pays are committed by the we all of the stars in the white house don't like to be called czars which is

good indication that is what they are -- [laughter] -- can determine the pace skill for executives although companies that receive bailouts and the argument is made a took government money down to the canal can take government control. in a "america for sale" imet argument and the bailout's. companies have to feel, let them fail. return the government money. the government management of the private economy is a fundamental violation of the private enterprise system which has made this country great. we built the greatest middle class in the world. by a private enterprise system, and even a union movement is certainly in its original days going back to the 20's and 30's probably could do communist revolution from happening in america by redefining that the capitalist equation had to include the value of labor, to act. today we are forgetting all those principles. as we pursue free trade saying

it doesn't matter as long as we get a cheap sneakers. what sleeve made those sneakers? well, it does matter because we will lose the middle class if we don't define china's middle class. and similarly saying of the government comes in and sits a few pay scales that a few banks they are making too much anyway what difference does it make? if we allow in the of financial gain to be the driving principle, we are headed straight down the socialist path from each according to their ability come each according to their need and don't make much money in the meantime. but as i pointed out, president obama and his first days in office said ap cap for those who could work in the white house. i called the white house and said will this apply to president obama? the white house always says dr. jerome corsi, you don't understand it was voted by law, he has to take it.

i said as i recall so was john kennedy's paygo to buy law. he agreed to work for a dollar a year. is president obama going to make the same contribution back to the government? i see that he has a few best-selling books. i don't think that he's lacking for money. so, the globalist never intend for them to lose people like george soros or henry kissinger orszag new brzezinski or david rockefeller, who i point out as a globalist. they are advisers like robert mondell or like joseph stieglitz, who identified. they always assumed they are going to be the winners. they are going to make millions and billions promoting globalism by reduced it to your wealth of the middle class to others with the idea we can build a worldwide global underclass dependent on the benefits. that is a formula for slavery.

it's not a formula for individual the advancement, for the opportunity to live a free life, for those principles we have to return to the constitution. i would like to see a constitutional challenge of the obama administration's determined takeover of the private economy. through utilizing crises and manipulating those crises without and. i would like to see the bank's return the bailouts and would like the american people to reserve no more bailouts ever again. thank you, all, for being here. it's been a tremendous honor and privilege to be here. thank you very much. [applause] and we are going to set the table in the front and i am going to sign everybody's books and don't worry, i will stay here and sign everybody's book until they are finished. i will write a personal inscription. thank you very much.

[inaudible conversations] >> i will sign any books today the you brought or by, whatever books they are. >> jerome corsi is the author of the weekly financial strategy newsletter alert. his books include the obama nation leftist politics and personality and unfit for command, swift vote veterans speak out against john kerry. he is a contributor to worldnetdaily and to read his work on a visit wnd.com. the first issue i want to take up is the issue of food miles and food miles impresses me for a number of reasons mainly because i have been shocked at how quickly it's become an easy proxy for the carbon footprint

of our food. i think a lot of consumers, a lot of fast food consumers quickly is as yet the distance of the food and travel with environmental and pact of that food. and the closer i look at the problem, food miles turn out to be in a lot of ways the least of our concerns. and a number of reasons let me to think this. let me to think there were problems with getting too much priority to food miles in the distance that our food travels to get from farm to the plate. one is i noted and i noted in the book it doesn't pay attention or give enough credence to comparative advantage. there are places in the country, pleases in the world that are simply more conducive to producing lots of fruits and vegetables and other places.

and in the united states this is particularly i would urge you to look at water stress map, a map of stress regions in the united states. look at a map like that and realize quickly there are certain places where there is a natural let advantage, natural comparative advantage to produce lots of crops with minimal water and puts because the water is already there. and i think i focus on food miles for gets this point and the fact that we can produce food in places where it should be produced for national conditions are conducive to producing the worst food and then shipped to other places. and the shipping is really quite small factor next to the cost and a small cost of the water. of course right now we are doing it all wrong. we are getting our food from california, and of course

california is essentially a desert because all of its water from elsewhere. to me that is the way not to give it and so comparative advantage is something i think food miles pay attention to and is something we should pay attention to. another factor i think food miles does not take into consideration is economy of scale every now and then i am guilty of the thinking like a capitalist, and economy of scale strikes me as an important concept talking about global food production. and something called a point i make in the book that i like to remind people of skeptical leading food miles is 20,000 apples or 2,000 apples let's say traveling by truck to thousand

miles from an energy perspective is no different than 20 apples traveling by truck by 20 miles. the important calculation here is monreal per adel and of course it is going to be the same for both of them. i have very little love in my heart for industrial agriculture and i don't believe i see a good deal about it in my book. unfortunately a lot of people who read my work think i am somehow in bed with industrial agriculture. it's simply not true. one area i would give industrial agriculture confidence is where the need to move something efficiently and cheaply they can and so they can to get into a skilled economies where there is incentive for them to do so. so this is again something that i think emphasis on food miles needs to take into consideration

and distance is not always the problem a lot of the i don't want is a propaganda but a lot of the food miles rhetoric would lead you to think. i think more important than the other two final points i want to mention about food negative and one critical of food miles in the book is if you are just going to focus on the distance to the troubles there is a chance, i'm not saying everyone thinks this way but as consumers we can only take on so much and there is a chance that you might not pay as much attention to what really matters. i think when it comes to the energy cost of our food, and that is production. lifecycle assessments, which will get the energy used in the production of food at every stage from growing the food to packaging and shipping it, it reveals that transportation as an overall energy scene, as an overall energy costs, transportation in the overall lifecycle of the food product is about 10%.

and so, my question is what is going on with this other 90%, and where are the inefficiencies' happening? where are the energy hidden is often areas of production. and one of the things that really frustrates me is it's really ethically consumed consumers we are not taking the time to investigate how our food is produced. let me get a couple of examples of how food miles and emphasis on food miles can lead to counter intuitive results, and there are two studies both of which are summarized in my book. one has to do with land, and the study that was funded by the new zealand government has an interest in not come here but the study found in great britain it may actually more sense energy lies in terms of energy efficiency it made more sense to purchase your land from new

zealand environmentally than it did to purchase your land locally in the u.k.. and hugo haag is that possible? that can't be possible because traveling across the world. transportation doesn't matter compared to the fact that the land that is produced in new zealand is produced under natural conditions. if it is grass that land and england the land they were comparing it to was produced under confined animal feed lot conditions and industrial conditions. the energies in clause in the form of production. it wasn't in the distance of the land troubled. another example involves tomatoes. if you what local hothouse tomatoes, tomato is to grow with input of heat and under artificial conditions and we bought those locally, it would actually be ten times more energy inefficient than if you got tomatoes grown naturally on the other side of the world. and, you know, these examples are really more than anecdotal. i think the point to